[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 12:08:38 +0100
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
Cc: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Daniel Wang <wonderfly@...gle.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Peter Feiner <pfeiner@...gle.com>,
linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCHv2 3/4] serial: introduce uart_port locking helpers
On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 12:12:49PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (10/16/18 14:04), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> [..]
> > - The first entry point is console ->write() callback, which we call
> > from printk(). A possible deadlock scenario there is:
> >
> > CPU0
> > <NMI>
> > spin_lock_irqsave(&port->lock, flags) << deadlock
> > serial_foo_write()
> > call_console_drivers()
> > console_unlock()
> > console_flush_on_panic()
> > panic()
> > <NMI/>
> > spin_lock_irqsave(&port->lock, flags)
> > serial_foo_write()
> > call_console_drivers()
> > console_unlock()
> > printk()
> > ...
>
> [..]
> > - The rest (of entry points) requires a bit different handling.
> > Let's take a look at the following backtrace:
> >
> > CPU0
> > <IRQ>
> > spin_lock_irqsave(&port->lock, flags) << deadlock
> > serial_foo_write()
> > call_console_drivers()
> > console_unlock()
> > printk()
> > __queue_work()
> > tty_flip_buffer_push()
> > spin_lock_irqsave(&port->lock, flags)
> > serial_foo_handle_IRQ()
> > <IRQ/>
> >
> > Serial drivers invoke tons of core kernel functions - WQ, MM, etc. All
> > of which may printk() in various cases. So we can't really just
> > "remove those printk-s". The simples way to address this seems to be
> > PRINTK_SAFE_CONTEXT_MASK.
>
> serial/UART and printk guys, sorry to bother you, do you hate this
> idea of removing console_driver->CORE KERNEL->printk->console_driver
> deadlock path? Or is there any chance we can move forward?
If done in a sane manner, no objection from me.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists